Pennsylvania State University. 

After returning from Germany, Peters attended Officer Candidate School and received a commission in 1980. Subsequently, he served with Battalion - 46th Infantry Regiment. then part of the 1st Armored Division. He spent ten years in Germany working in military intelligence. Later he became a  Foreign Area Officer specializing in the Soviet Union His last assignment was to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. He retired in 1998 with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. 





































































individuals that are willing to stop  the outlandish spending habits of the current administration.






 

 





















Patriot PAC
PO Box  4206
St Paul MN 55104


info@uspatriotpac.com
651 602 9353 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PATRIOT  PAC




 


Obama Lost Every State with Voter ID 
Pat Dollard


November 7 | Was the election stolen? Remember all those lawsuits by Democrats demanding that any voter identification laws be repealed. Well, now we know why they filed them. They needed to steal the vote in certain key states so that Obama could be reelected.

Curiously, Obama lost in every state that requires a photo ID to be produced before voting. A list of closely contested state elections with no voter ID, which narrowly went to Obama include: Minnesota (10), Iowa (6), Wisconsin (10), Nevada (6), Colorado (9), New Mexico (5) and Pennsylvania (20). This amounts to a total of 66 electoral votes. When added to Romney’s total of 205 electoral votes, that would give Romney 271 electoral votes, enough votes to win even without Ohio or Florida.

Romney also likely had the states of Florida and Ohio stolen from him, which don’t require photo IDs. Ohio requires a non-photo ID. Would a library card do? Florida “requests” a photo ID, but doesn’t require it. So what happens if they request a photo ID and the illegal alien Haitian doesn’t have one? Do they just count the vote anyway?

Election Comparison Voter Id Laws

Add to all this, electronic vote fraud. An article from the Blaze reports “Last week, TheBlaze brought you a story from a North Carolina voting precinct using electronic voting machines that was already experiencing issues where votes for GOP candidate Mitt Romney were being changed to Democratic candidate Barack Obama. Now, it’s allegedly happening again, this time in both Kansas and Ohio — and we talked to a vendor supporting the machines about the issue. Nancy from Topeka, Kan., who asked that her last name not be used for reasons pertaining to her husband’s work, told TheBlaze she fears if voters aren’t double checking their selections, they’ll be ‘robbed of their vote.’ Nancy explained that while her husband was casting a vote for Romney, the touchscreen highlighted Obama. “He played around with the field a little and realized that in order to vote for Romney, his finger had to be exactly on the mark,” Nancy wrote in an email. She said ‘the invisible Obama field came down about 1/4 [of an inch]‘ into what should technically have been the Romney area”

Funny how this “glitch” only benefited Obama while stealing votes from Romney. I wonder how many other “glitches” were out there and how big a role they played in Obama’s “victory”.

No incumbent president in the last 60 years has won reelection with the unemployment rate as high as it currently is. The only way left for the Democrats to keep Obama in office was to steal the election. Obama failed to win ANY states with photo ID laws for voters, but he did win all the swing states which require no voter ID. Add to this electronic “glitches” that gave Obama votes meant for Romney, and it’s pretty obvious what happened on November 6th, 2012. We just became a Third World country.

 

2012 Voter ID Laws:

Voter Id by States

* New voter ID law has not yet been implemented; state presently has no voter ID law in effect.

** New voter ID law has not yet been implemented; an older voter ID law remains in effect.

(1) In Alabama, South Carolina and Texas, current non-photo voter ID laws stay in effect for the time being. The new photo voter ID requirements will take effect after receiving preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. South Carolina and Texas were denied pre-clearance in December 2011 and March 2012, respectively. Alabama’s new photo ID law has a 2014 effective date, and the state has not yet applied for pre-clearance. The Texas law was recently denied pre-clearance by a federal court in D.C.; a similar court is currently considering South Carolina’s law.

(2) Wisconsin’s voter ID law was declared unconstitutional on March 12, 2012. Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess issued a permanent injunction barring enforcement of the law, which the state has said it will appeal. Read the March 6 injunction and the March 12 injunction.

(3) There are some who prefer to call Oklahoma a photo voter ID state, because most voters will show a photo ID before voting. However, Oklahoma law also permits a voter registration card issued by the appropriate county elections board to serve as proof of identity in lieu of photo ID.

(4) Rhode Island’s voter ID law takes effect in two stages. The first stage, requiring a non-photo ID, took effect on January 1, 2012. On January 1, 2014, a photo ID requirement will replace the non-photo ID law.

(5) Alabama’s new photo ID requirement takes effect with the 2014 statewide primary election. The new law also requires preclearance. The delayed implementation date was intended to ensure that the timing of preclearance did not occur between the primary and general elections of 2012, thus creating voter confusion.

(6) Mississippi’s new voter ID law was passed via the citizen initiative process. However, the language in constitutional amendment passed by MS voters on Nov. 8 is very general, and implementing legislation will be required before the amendment can take effect. The MS provision will also require pre-clearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act before it can take effect.

(7) A state judge temporarily blocked enforcement of Pennsylvania’s new voter ID law. It will not be in effect for the November 2012 election, and a trial on its permanent status will begin after the election.

 

By RALPH PETERS

Ralph Peters is Fox News' strategic analyst and the author of "Looking for Trouble."
United States Army Lieutenant Colonel, novelist and essayist. He has sometimes written under the pen name Owen Parry.

Ralph has written numerous fiction and non-fiction books. Please check out your local bookstores.
This article appeared in the New York Post this week. If you would like to contact Ralph. please contact us at
info@uspatriot.com  P
eters enlisted in the Army as a Private in 1976 after attending Pennsylvania State University.

After returning from Germany, Peters attended Officer Candidate School and received a commission in 1980. Subsequently, he served with Battalion - 46th Infantry Regiment. then part of the 1st Armored Division. He spent ten years in Germany working in military intelligence. Later he became a Foreign Area Officer specializing in the Soviet Union His last assignment was to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. He retired in 1998 with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.



What was Obama thinking?

The real climax of President Obama's Spring Apologies Tour wasn't his photo op with our troops in Baghdad or even his "American Guilt" concerts in Western Europe.

While fans in the press cheered wildly at every venue, the real performance came in Turkey. And it was a turkey.

Obama means well. Just as Jimmy Carter, his policy godfather, meant well. But the road to embassy takeovers and strategic humiliation is paved with good intentions -- coupled with distressing naivete.

On every stage, Obama draped Lady Liberty in sackcloth and ashes, drawing plentiful applause but no serious economic or security cooperation in return. Then, in Turkey, he surrendered our national pride, undercut our interests and interfered in matters that aren't his business.

On the latter point: Suppose the European Union president went to Cuba and insisted that the world's sunniest concentration camp should be welcomed into NAFTA? That's the equivalent of what our president did in Ankara on Monday when he declared that he supports Turkey's bid for EU membership.

The Europeans don't want Turkey in their club. Because Turkey isn't a European state, nor is its culture European. And it isn't our business to press Europe to embrace a huge, truculent Muslim country suffering a creeping Islamist coup. every stage, Obama draped Lady Liberty in sackcloth and ashes, drawing plentiful applause but no serious economic or security cooperation in return. Then, in Turkey, he surrendered our national pride, undercut our interests and interfered in matters that aren't his business.

The Europeans were appalled by Turkey's neo-Taliban tantrum on-stage at last week's NATO summit. The Turks fought to derail the appointment of a great Dane, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, as the new NATO secretary general. Why? Because he didn't stone to death the Danish cartoonist who caricatured Mohammed.

Which brings us to the even bigger problem: Obama has no idea what's going on in Turkey. By going to Ankara on his knees, he gave his seal of approval to a pungently anti-American Islamist government bent on overturning Mustapha Kemal's legacy of the separation of mosque and state.

Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party, the AKP, means headscarves, Korans, censorship and stacked elections. The country's alarmed middle class opposes the effort to turn the country into an Islamic state. Obama's gushing praise for the AKP's bosses left them aghast.

Obama's embrace of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (now orchestrating show trials of his opponents) was one step short of going to Tehran and smooching President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

What was Obama thinking? He wasn't. He relied on advice from State Department appeasement artists who understand neither Turkey, Islam nor the crises raging between the Bosporus and the Indus. State's answer is always "More love, more humility, more aid."

Well, I, for one, don't think our country has anything to apologize for, either to Turkey or to Europe.

Insisting that America's always guilty, Obama omitted any mention of Turkey's wartime betrayals of our troops, its continuing oppression of its Kurd minority or the AKP's determination to turn a state with a secular constitution into a Wahhabi playground.

When it came to the Armenian genocide, Obama bravely ducked: He never dared use the g-word.

And Obama's disdainful remarks about President Bush were just shabby.

After those overpriced tour T-shirts have shrunk in the wash (trust me -- they will), what will we have gained from Obama's superstar act?

He told the Europeans that the global economic crisis is all our fault. No mention of European greed, overleveraged governments, destructive Euro-loans or Chinese currency manipulation. We did it. Whip us, please.

In return, the Europeans gave him . . . nothing.

Even though Obama was right when he said that Europe faces a greater terror threat than we do, the entire continent only ponied up 2,500 short-term non-combat troops for Afghanistan. The Europeans know we'll do the heavy lifting.

He gave the Russians yet another blank check, too. (Meanwhile, in Moscow, Putin's thugs beat an aging pro-democracy dissident to a pulp.) In return, the Russians promised to . . . well, actually, they didn't promise anything.

Then Obama went to Turkey, undercut secular political parties, infuriated the Europeans -- and disclaimed our country's Judeo-Christian heritage. (Did Turkey's leaders respond by denying Islam's importance to them? Naw.)

In Turkey, Obama got . . . nothing we didn't already have.

Then he went to Iraq and told its prime minister that Iraq would get nothing.

I believe that our president wants to do the right thing. But he doesn't have a clue how. For now, he's enraptured by the applause. But he hasn't tried to charge his fans for their tickets. And they've already made up their minds they won't have to pay.


Forward, into the past! Michael J Fell

Michael is a  former MCA recording artist and traveling minstrel from the 1970’s punk rock era, visual artist who works with oil on canvas. A nationally recognized Conservative blogger with a large footprint on Facebook and Monicamemo.com and a contributing writer for www.uspatriotpac.com

Historically, smaller government and lower tax rates have proven to be more fiscally responsible than the current big government, big spending plans enacted by the Obama Administration and the Democratic Congressional majority. Thanks to their victories in 2006 and 2008, the Democrats can enact virtually any legislation they conjure up. This is already posing a clear and present danger to the fabric of our sovereign nation.

In response, patriotic Conservatives need to unite and contribute their ideas, time, energy and effort to the
rebirth of a new Republican Party.

This current spending plan is a disaster to those who support individual liberties. Most of the current "tax cuts" are a redistribution of wealth. They're a lowering the payroll deduction for working people; many of whom don't make enough money to owe income tax. All this means is, at the end of the year those people will be getting a smaller income tax refund. In other cases, they're getting welfare checks. President Obama and the Congressional Democrats will continue to reduce personal income taxes for more and more people until the majority of people don't pay any taxes. Meanwhile, they will increase the tax burden on businesses and individuals. As businesses fail, more
people will begin receiving welfare checks. Only the "rich" will be taxed. Congress will jack up the tax rates on those who pay for the growing number of welfare checks. The majority of people won't care because it won't affect them, since they will no longer be paying taxes. This creates a giant underclass, dependent upon government for survival and, as a byproduct, life under government's control.

The government has already loaned billions to banks. In exchange for those billions the government has received preferred shares of stock in those banks. Holders of preferred stock are first in line for any dividends paid out to shareholders. Since the banks have to pay the government back those billions, holders of common stock will receive no dividends. Everyday investors won't buy stock in those banks; instead, they'll sell their shares in order to use that capital on an investment that will pay a dividend. This will lead to the de facto nationalization of the banking system.

Tax cuts would help in more than one way.

Corporations don't pay their taxes. They pass the cost of those taxes on to the consumers. An elimination of corporate taxes would lower the cost of goods to consumers and create an incentive for investment by both individual investors and group funds. It would eliminate the need for corporations to lobby Congress for more favorable tax structures and/or creation of additional loopholes.

A cut in business tax rates would leave more money in the hands of businesses that succeed, and help those businesses grow through the reinvestment of profit. Growing businesses have a need for new employees. Growing companies which are hiring instead of laying off employees make people more secure in their own economic future and therefore more likely to engage in discretionary consumer spending.

A cut in personal income tax rates would also aid discretionary consumer spending. This would improve the demand side of the economic equation without slow, wasteful government spending which requires borrowing (with interest) or printing money, which fuels inflation.

It's seems clear which direction the United States should take. That direction is forward, into the past.and towards the fiscal responsibility of a reborn Republican party.


Energy Independence
Michael J Fell

There's widespread consensus in the United States that America needs to become energy independent. America's ever growing dependence on foreign energy puts her at greater risk in a highly unstable world.

That's pretty much where the agreement ends.

Liberals feel an urgent need to create a green environment. Proposals made by the Obama administration and congressional Democrats indicate a desire to achieve this end at all costs, come what may. Stiffer regulations on auto emissions and mileage, carbon cap and trade regulations on energy providers, regulations against development of domestic natural resources, government spending on solar, wind, tide and bio-fuel technology.

While these measures do promote the development of renewable energies, they dictate a highly impatient, frenetic pace that will cripple the American economy at a moment of fragility. They force the issue at the worst possible time...during a deep recession.

America's public and industrial infrastructure are based chiefly on the use of fossil fuels: petroleum, natural gas and coal, as well as nuclear power. Virtually everyone who drives drives a vehicle that burns gasoline or diesel. Public transportation relies on fossil fuels as well. Natural gas, heating oil and coal are used in our furnaces to heat our homes and places of business. Coal and nuclear power generate electricity, which powers countless devices we take for granted every day. Coal, natural gas and petroleum products power American's industrial complex, the base of our economic engine. America's economy heavily depends on these existing sources of power. These methods of providing and consuming energy are deeply ingrained in our business, manufacturing and home life.

It's impractical to expect to change the methods of powering an entire society of 304 million people overnight. It's going to take decades to finish such an enormous task.

In the meantime, what energy's going to be used in the manufacture, delivery and installation of the windmills, solar
panels, turbines, generators and power grid required to provide renewable energy to the public?

The renewable energy delivery system that needs to be built?

No, sorry, the energy that's going to be used will be traditional fossil fuels.

Why are we going to continue to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on foreign energy while America's making this conversion to renewable energy sources? At a time when millions of Americans are looking for work and our economy is starving for liquid capital, why aren't we taking advantage of our own wealth of natural resources? Why aren't we giving Americans jobs drilling for oil and natural gas or digging for coal? Why aren't we putting people to work building refineries and power plants? Why aren't we giving energy employees jobs delivering gas, coal and natural gas to consumers? How many peripheral jobs will be created in the process? For every new oil well, power plant, refinery or mine there will be new roads built, followed by restaurants, stores and housing. All provided by the private sector. Why aren't we keeping those billions of dollars at home, in our own economy?

In the interest of national security and job creation, America should be putting Americans to work delivering American energy to Americans. This is the best way to power our conversion to a "green" energy sector. Trying to force the liberal's green agenda down America's throat overnight will contribute to the destruction of our economy. We don't need a broken economy. We need energy independence.

Let's do it the right way.

 

 

 






 

 

“All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word:
freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.” 
-Winston Churchill


Paid for by Patriot Political Action Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or campaign committee
www.uspatriotpac.com/org

 
 
 
 
 
 
Website Builder